This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk/7671787.stm

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Tube terror patrols 'not armed' Police 'could kill without order'
(about 1 hour later)
Firearms officers were not routinely deployed on public transport after the 7/7 bombings, an inquest has heard. Firearms officers were prepared to kill a man they thought was one of the failed London bombers without orders from their seniors, an inquest heard.
Ch Insp Vince Esposito said patrols had remained unarmed because specialist officers were busy on other operations. An anonymous inspector told the inquest of Jean Charles de Menezes they were ready to act if senior officers could not make the "career-threatening" move.
He told the inquest of Jean Charles de Menezes that the Brazilian had been shot in a "calm" and "controlled" manner by trained firearms police. The inquest heard Brazilian Mr de Menezes, 27, was killed in a "calm and controlled" way as he got on the tube.
The 27-year-old was killed as he got on the Tube when police mistook him for one of the failed 21 July 2005 bombers. Police had mistaken him for a suspect in the attempted 21 July 2005 attacks.
Mr Esposito was asked by a jury if there had been an increased police presence on London transport networks after four bombs exploded, killing 52 innocent people, on 7 July 2005. The senior tactical adviser, codenamed Trojan 84, told the hearing that officers were ready to take a "critical" shot.
He replied: "My understanding was, yes, there was increased patrolling throughout that time." The inspector, whose identity was protected during the inquest, told how he briefed the marksmen who shot dead Mr de Menezes, who was mistaken for failed bombing suspect Hussain Osman.
But when asked whether specialist firearms were called in, he replied: "No, sir. They were engaged in other operations." His designated senior officer (DSO) on the day in question, had been Deputy Assistant Commissioner Cressida Dick.
'Prepared to shoot'
Giving evidence for the first time in open court, he said: "We felt that for any DSO to make a decision about a critical shot was a hugely difficult decision to make and maybe career-threatening.
"In relation to the critical shot, the instruction would come direct from the DSO but what I also mentioned was that if we were able to challenge, but the subject was not-compliant, then a shot may be taken."
When asked if officers were prepared to take the critical shot without word from his bosses, he replied: "Yes."
He added: "It was my job to tell the team they would be supported whatever decision they took because of the structures that were in place."
'Extreme circumstances''Extreme circumstances'
The experienced firearms officer joined the Metropolitan force in 1980 and helped Scotland Yard develop tactics to deal with suicide bombers. Earlier, tactical adviser Ch Insp Vince Esposito had spoken about how Mr de Menezes had been shot as he boarded a train at Stockwell station on the day after the failed bombings.
He claimed Mr de Menezes, an electrician, was shot in a "calm" and "controlled" manner, when he boarded a train at Stockwell station on the day after the failed bombings. He said: "Everybody is human and we all get excited occasionally but it is the training that enables us to carry out the duties as happened on this day in a calm and controlled manner."
Mr Esposito said: "Everybody is human and we all get excited occasionally but it is the training that enables us to carry out the duties as happened on this day in a calm and controlled manner." Ch Insp Esposito, who said armed intervention was used in only the most "extreme" circumstances, said Mr de Menezes would have been shot on that day whether he had been carrying a rucksack or not.
Mr Esposito, who said armed intervention was used in only the most "extreme" circumstances, claimed Mr de Menezes would have been shot on that day whether he had been carrying a rucksack or not.
Explosive device
When asked if explosives could have been concealed on Mr de Menezes's body or in his pockets, he said: "It is very difficult indeed to say if he was carrying an explosive device."When asked if explosives could have been concealed on Mr de Menezes's body or in his pockets, he said: "It is very difficult indeed to say if he was carrying an explosive device."
The jury at Oval cricket ground, south London, has heard claims Mr de Menezes was "virtually dead" from the moment he got off his bus. The experienced firearms officer joined the Metropolitan force in 1980 and helped Scotland Yard develop tactics to deal with suicide bombers.
Mr Esposito told how he was convinced the Brazilian electrician was Osman after he got off and on the same bus travelling through south London. He told the jury there had been an increased police presence on London transport networks after four bombs exploded, killing 52 innocent people, on 7 July 2005.
But when Mr Esposito claimed Mr de Menezes was killed by "tragic" misidentification, Michael Mansfield QC, representing the de Menezes family, alleged: "The moment he gets off the bus he is virtually dead." But he said firearms officers had not been routinely deployed because they were busy on other operations.
The inquest continues.